Epistemic Conditions for Equilibrium in Beliefs without Independence
AbstractR. J. Aumann and A. Brandenburger (1995) provide sufficient conditions on the knowledge of the players in a game for their beliefs to constitute a Nash equilibrium. They assume, among other things, mutual knowledge of rationality. By rationality of a player, it is meant that the action chosen by him maximizes his expected utility, given his beliefs. There is, however, no need to restrict the notion of rationality to expected utility maximization. This paper shows that their result can be generalized to the case where players' preferences over uncertain outcomes belong to a large class of nonexpected utility preferences. (c) 1996 Academic Press, Inc.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Economic Theory.
Volume (Year): 70 (1996)
Issue (Month): 2 (August)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622869
Other versions of this item:
- Volij, Oscar, 1996. "Epistemic Conditions for Equilibrium in Beliefs Without Independence," Staff General Research Papers 5169, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Volij, Oscar, 2002.
"A remark on bargaining and non-expected utility,"
Mathematical Social Sciences,
Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 17-24, September.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.